ÿWPC¬  …# VUNa %¯ 0(µU<Ýw@ 4Y m 0l| 0Dè , 0J4 0T~ 0^Ò 0h0 0r˜ 0| 0†† 0 1uœ U, 0d= B¡U,¾U>êB)(DCQ AM” D3áU*!> 0@_ÕŸtîwQev~¶vÓ4 AOÆV 0D D/` B ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡-šBu Z‹$Arrus BT Roman D U!U"D#U$%î&Ó€0Gav 3|x0((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d''''7Border 1dd€-(Cþÿ << Gÿÿ""""'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Arial Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÔ€+ÔÔ€+ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€+XÔÌÌMay€24,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò ËÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€ÔOmer€filed€a€Motion€to€Dismiss€under€Tenn.R.Civ.P.€12.02;Ïhowever,€because€the€parties€presented€materials€outside€the€pleadingsÏfor€the€courtððs€consideration,€the€trial€court€properly€treated€theÏmotion€as€one€for€summary€judgment.€Ì ùÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ÔNo€criminal€charges€were€filed€against€Robinson€or€Lineberry.Ì äÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€ÔThompson€testified€in€his€deposition€that€he€did€not€recall€howÏRobinsonððs€role€in€the€videotaping€came€to€his€attention.€€OmerÏtestified€that€he€did€not€know€Robinson€was€the€cameraman;€in€fact,€heÏonly€informed€Thompson€of€a€single€lingerie€party€hosted€by€Lineberry.Ì GÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€ÔWhether€Omer€breached€a€legal€or€ethical€duty€to€Lineberry,€aÏformer€client,€is€not€a€question€before€this€Court.€€ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€%%X„d&ÓÑ#€%%Xd#ÑÔ€&ÔÝ  ÝÑ7€6XXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÒ  ÒÒ „ Òà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌà àà à€€Ï________________________________________________ÌÌò òWILLIAM€ROBINSON,€a/k/aÌBILLY€C.€ROBINSON,ó óÌÌà àPlaintiff„Appellant,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDavidson€Law€95C„59ÌVs.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àC.A.No.€01A01„9510„CV„00434ÌÌò òJAMES€R.€OMER,€SR.,ó óÌÙ€€ÙßL€),(;+'h|åh` ç `€€Lßà àÌà àDefendant„Appellee.Ì___________________________________________________________________________ÌÌà@ àFROM€THE€THIRD€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€BARBARA€N.€HAYNES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌà@ àWinston€S.€Evans,€Evans,€Jones€&€Reynolds€of€NashvilleÌà@ àFor€AppelleeÌÌà@ àRobert€L.€Callis€of€Mt.€JulietÌà@ àFor€AppellantÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àò òòòREVERSED€IN€PART,€AFFIRMED€IN€PART€AND€REMANDEDÌÌó óóóà@ àOpinion€filed:ÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€JUDGEÌÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGEó óÌÌÌÑ X ÑÑ7€6XXdìXXdì7ÑÑ  ÑÓÓ›à àThis€case€involves€allegations€of€negligent€misrepresentation,Ïoutrageous€conduct,€and€invasion€of€privacy.€€Plaintiff€William€RobinsonÏappeals€œfrom€the›€trial€courtððs€œorder€granting›€œsummary›€judgment€toÏdefendant€James€Omer€as€to€all€three€claims.× ƒ. ××  ×€€Ìà àThe€facts€of€this€case,€as€alleged€in€Robinsonððs€amendedÏcomplaint,€supported€by€€affidavits€and€depositions,€are€as€follows:€€InÏapproximately€1986,€Robinson,€a€contractor,€agreed€to€construct€anÏoffice€building€in€Mt.€Juliet,€Tennessee,€for€Dewey€Lineberry,€a€localÏbusinessman.€€Lineberry€decided€to€include€a€camera€room€with€twoÏway€mirrors€in€his€building.€€He€told€Robinson€€he€was€concerned€thatÍwomen€with€whom€he€had€sexual€encounters€might€falsely€accuse€himÏof€rape.€€By€having€filmed€recordings€of€his€sexual€encounters,ÏLineberry€believed€he€would€protect€himself€from€such€allegations.€€€Ìà àDefendant,€James€Omer,€is€a€licensed€Tennessee€attorney€whoÏrepresented€Lineberry€on€various€occasions€between€the€mid„1970'sÏand€1990.€€According€to€Robinsonððs€amended€complaint,€Omer€advisedÏLineberry,€prior€to€the€construction€of€the€office€building,€that€bothÏcreating€a€taping€room€with€two€way€mirrors€and€secretly€tapingÏsexual€encounters€could€be€legally€done.€€Lineberryððs€affidavit€statesÏthat€Omer€and€Lineberry€together€came€up€with€the€idea€of€building€theÏhidden€taping€room€with€two€way€mirrors.€€Lineberry€also€states€thatÏOmer€suggested€that€Lineberry€enlist€Robinson€to€act€as€theÏcameraman.€€Lineberry€admits€that€he€never€told€Omer€that€he€in€factÏdecided€to€use€Robinson€for€the€job.€€According€to€both€Robinson€andÏLineberry,€Lineberry€on€one€€occasion€called€Omer€for€the€purpose€ofÏreassuring€Robinson€of€the€legality€of€secretly€videotaping€hisÏ[Lineberryððs]€sexual€encounters€and€Omer,€who€had€been€told€byÏLineberry€that€Robinson€was€in€the€room,€again€told€Lineberry€that€suchÏactivity€was€legal.€€Robinson€asserts€that€Omer€knew€or€should€haveÏknown€that€Robinson,€or€others€similarly€situated,€was€privy€to€andÏrelied€upon€Omerððs€advice€that€it€was€ð ðlegally€permissibleðð€toÍvideotape€Ñ ° ÑœLineberryððs›€sexual€encounters€without€the€consent€of€theÏwomen€involved.€€In€electing€to€act€as€Lineberryððs€cameraman,€RobinsonÏclaims€that€he€justifiably€relied€on€Omerððs€advice.Ìà àLineberryððs€affidavit€also€states€that€prior€to€1992,€OmerÏcontacted€Lineberry,€promising€Lineberry€a€fee€should€Lineberry€referÏcases€to€Omer.€€According€to€Lineberry,€he€in€fact€did€refer€a€personalÏinjury€case€to€Omer,€and€that€case€resulted€in€a€large€settlement.€€OmerÏreportedly€refused€to€pay€Lineberry€the€agreed€fee,€as€a€result€of€whichÏLineberry€reported€Omer€to€the€Tennessee€Board€of€ProfessionalÏResponsibility€(TBPR).€€According€to€Lineberry,€when€Omer€discoveredÏthat€Lineberry€reported€him€to€the€TBPR,€Omer,€in€retaliation,Ïcontacted€Tom€Thompson,€District€Attorney€General€for€Wilson€County,ÏTennessee,€and€informed€Thompson€of€the€existence€of€LineberryððsÏhidden€camera€room€with€two€way€mirrors€and€the€fact€that€LineberryÏsecretly€videotaped€women€during€a€lingerie€party.€€Although€Omer€didÏnot€specifically€mention€Robinson€at€that€time,€it€is€clear€fromÏThompsonððs€deposition€that€Thompson€knew€a€third€party€was€involved.€ÏSubsequent€to€receiving€this€information,€Thompson€€issued€a€searchÏwarrant€for€Lineberryððs€office€and€home,€which€revealed€the€existenceÏof€several€videotapes,€as€well€as€Robinsonððs€involvement€as€LineberryððsÍcameraman.€€The€Wilson€County€sheriffððs€office€contacted€the€womenÏwho€were€secretly€taped,€and€they€subsequently€filed€civil€suitsÏagainst€Lineberry€and€Robinson,€allegedly€damaging€plaintiff× ƒ/ ××  ×.€€€TheÏcomplaint€alleges:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àAs€a€result€of€these€lawsuits€and€OmerððsÏnegligent€misrepresentations,€Robinson€incurredÏsubstantial€damages€by€way€of€being€required€toÏhire€attorneys€to€defend€him€and€by€way€ofÏhaving€to€pay€out€substantial€sums€by€way€ofÏsettlement€for€the€invasion€of€the€privacy€of€theÏfour€(4)€women.€€Additionally,€as€a€result€of€theÏpublic€disclosure€of€the€videotaping€andÏRobinsonððs€involvement€therein€and€OmerððsÏnegligent€misrepresentations,€Robinson€wasÏcaused€to€suffer€other€serious€and€substantialÏdamages€and€injuries,€including,€but€not€by€wayÏof€limitation,€emotional€distress,€damage€toÏreputation,€injury€to€businessððs€owned€byÏRobinson€by€way€of€loss€of€business€and€income,Ïall€of€which€will€be€shown€to€the€Court€at€aÏhearing€of€this€cause.ÌÌà@ àI.ÌÌÓÓà àA€trial€court€should€grant€a€motion€for€summary€judgement€whenÏthe€movant€demonstrates€that€there€are€no€genuine€issues€of€materialÏfact€and€that€the€moving€party€is€entitled€to€a€judgment€as€a€matter€ofÏlaw.€€Tenn.R.Civ.P.€56.03.€€The€party€moving€for€summary€judgmentÍbears€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€no€genuine€issue€of€materialÏfact€exists.€€ò òòòByrd€v.€Halló óóó,€847€S.W.2d€208,€210€(Tenn.€1993).€€On€aÏmotion€for€summary€judgment,€the€trial€court€and€the€appellate€courtÏmust€consider€the€matter€in€the€same€manner€as€a€motion€for€directedÏverdict€made€at€the€close€of€the€plaintiffððs€proof;€that€is,€the€trialÏcourt€must€take€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favorÏof€the€nonmoving€party,€allow€all€reasonable€inferences€in€favor€of€thatÏparty€and€discard€all€countervailing€evidence.€€ò òòòId.óóó ó€at€210„11.€€TheÏphrase€ð ðgenuine€issueðð€as€stated€in€Tenn.R.Civ.P.€56.03€refers€toÏgenuine,€factual€issues€and€does€not€include€issues€involving€legalÏconclusions€to€be€drawn€from€the€facts.€€ò òòòIdó óóó.€at€211.€€In€ò òòòByrdó óóó,€the€courtÏstated:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àOnce€it€is€shown€by€the€moving€party€that€thereÏis€no€genuine€issue€of€material€fact,€theÏnonmoving€party€must€then€demonstrate,€byÏaffidavits€or€discovery€materials,€that€there€isÏa€genuine,€material€fact€dispute€to€warrant€aÏtrial.€€ò òòòFowler€v.€Happy€Goodman€Familyó óóó,€575ÏS.W.2d€496,€498€(Tenn.€1978);€ò òòòMerritt€v.ÏWilson€Cty.€Bd.€of€Zoning€Appealsó óóó,€656ÏS.W.2d€846,€859€(Tenn.€App.€1983).€€In€thisÏregard,€Rule€56.05€provides€that€a€nonmovingÏparty€cannot€simply€rely€upon€his€pleadings€butÏmust€set€forth€ò òspecific€factsó ó€showing€thatÏhere€is€a€genuine€issue€of€material€fact€for€trial.€Ïð ðIf€he€does€not€so€respond,€summary€judgment€.€.Ï.€shall€be€entered€against€him.ðð€€Rule€56.05Í(Emphasis€in€original).€Ìà@ àII.ÌÌÓÓà àRobinsonððs€issue€on€appeal€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏgranting€Omerððs€motion€for€summary€judgment€regarding€RobinsonððsÏclaims€of€negligent€misrepresentation,€outrageous€conduct,€andÏinvasion€of€privacy.€€We€consider€Robinsonððs€claim€of€negligentÏmisrepresentation€first.Ìà àTennessee€has€adopted€the€principles€set€forth€by€the€AmericanÏLaw€Institute€in€the€òòRestatement€(Second)€of€Tortsóó,€€ðð€552€(1977)Ïregarding€the€liability€of€professionals,€including€attorneys,€whoÏnegligently€supply€false€information€that€is€used€by€others€in€theirÏbusiness€transactions.€€òòò òStinson€v.€Brandó óóó,€738€S.W.2d€186,191€(Tenn.Ï1987).€€The€€òòRestatement€(Second)€of€Torts,óó€€ðð€552€(1977)€provides,€inÏpertinent€part:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àInformation€Negligently€Supplied€for€theÏGuidance€of€Others:€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à(1)€One€who,€in€the€course€of€his€business,Ïprofession€or€employment,€or€in€any€otherÏtransaction€in€which€he€has€a€pecuniary€interest,Ïsupplies€false€information€for€the€guidance€ofÏothers€in€their€business€transactions,€is€subjectÏto€liability€for€pecuniary€loss€caused€to€them€byÏtheir€justifiable€reliance€upon€the€information,Ïif€he€fails€to€exercise€reasonable€care€orÏcompetence€in€obtaining€or€communicating€theÍinformation.€€ÌÌà8 àà8 à(2)€Except€as€stated€in€Subsection€(3),€theÏliability€stated€in€Subsection€(1)€is€limited€toÏloss€suffered€ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 à(a)€by€the€person€or€one€of€a€limitedÏgroup€of€persons€for€whose€benefitÏand€guidance€he€intends€to€supply€theÏinformation€or€knows€that€theÏrecipient€intends€to€supply€it;€and€ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 à(b)€through€reliance€upon€it€in€aÏtransaction€that€he€intends€theÏinformation€to€influence€or€knowsÏthat€the€recipient€so€intends€or€in€aÏsubstantially€similar€transaction.€€€ÌÌÓÓà àThe€testimony€of€both€Robinson€and€Lineberry€establishes€thatÏOmer€was€Lineberryððs€attorney;€that€Lineberry€sought€advice€concerningÏthe€videotaping€from€Omer;€and€that€Omer,€as€Lineberryððs€attorney,Ïadvised€Lineberry€that€the€videotaping€was€ð ðlegally€permissibleðð€andÏwas€much€like€ð ðkeeping€a€diary.ðð€€The€proof€also€establishes€that€OmerÏknew€Robinson,€or€at€least€some€third€person,€would€act€as€cameramanÏin€reliance€upon€Omerððs€representation,€and€that€Robinson€œdid,›€in€fact,Ïœact€as›€the€cameraman€in€reliance€upon€the€representation€of€Omer.€€AsÏprovided€for€œin€the›€œòòRestatement›€(Second)€of€Tortsóó,€ðð€552,€an€attorneyððsÏduty€to€use€due€care€in€supplying€information€may€extend€to€thirdÏparties€with€whom€the€attorney€is€not€in€privity.€€ò òòòCollins€v.€Binkleyó óóó,Í750€S.W.2d€737,€739€(Tenn.€1988);€ò òòòStinson€v.€Brandó óóó,€738€S.W.2d€86,Ï191€(Tenn.€1987).Ìà àThe€record€reveals€genuine€issues€of€material€fact.€€Whether€OmerÏsupplied€information,€whether€he€failed€to€use€due€care€in€so€doing,Ïwhether€his€liability€would€extend€to€Robinson€pursuant€to€Paragraph€2,ÏòòRestatement€(Secondóó)€òòof€Torts,óó€€ðð€552,€and€whether€RobinsonÏjustifiably€relied€upon€the€information€are€disputes€for€the€trier€ofÏfact€and€are€not€appropriate€for€summary€judgment.€€Omer€asserts€thatÏextending€the€potential€liability€of€attorneys€to€nonclients,€under€theÏcircumstances€presented€in€this€case,€would€impose€an€ð ðintolerableÏburden€on€the€practice€of€law.ðð€€We€disagree.€€It€is€well„settled€that€anÏattorney€may€be€liable€to€a€limited€group€for€whose€benefit€he€knows€orÏshould€know€his€advice€is€intended.€€ò òòòStinson,€ó óóó738€S.W.2d€at€191;€ò òòòseeÏalsoóóó ó€ò òòòBethlehem€Steel€Corp.€V.€Ernst€&€Winneyó óóó,€822€S.W.2d€592Ï(Tenn.€1991);€ò òòòJohn€Martin€œCo.›€v.€Moore/Diesel,€Inc.,€ó óóó819€S.W.2dÏ428,€435€(Tenn.€1991).Ìà àOmer€also€argues€that€Robinson,€knowing€that€his€conduct€wasÏwrong,€cannot€now€assert€that€he€justifiably€relied€upon€Omerððs€allegedÏadvice.€€This€argument€is€without€merit.€€Morally€reprehensible€conductÏand€conduct€that€is€legally€prohibited€are€not€one€and€the€same.€€EquallyÍirrelevant,€in€the€same€vein,€is€Omerððs€allegation€that€Robinson€cannotÏclaim€reliance€upon€Omerððs€alleged€advice€because€Robinson€actuallyÏenjoyed€videotaping€Lineberryððs€encounters.€€Ìà àOmer€further€contends€that€this€Court€cannot€rely€on€RobinsonððsÏaffidavit€because€it€is€inconsistent€with€the€statement€Robinson€gaveÏat€the€Wilson€County€Sheriffððs€Department.€€ò òòòSee,€e.g.€Thomas€v.€GaryÏYeomans€Ford€Motor€Co.ó óóó,€No.€03A01„9411„CV„00396,€1995€WLÏ364263€(Tenn.€App.€E.S.€June€20,€1995).€€Our€review€of€the€record,Ïhowever,€reveals€that€Robinsonððs€affidavit€and€confession€are€notÏinconsistent.€€Furthermore,€we€do€not€find,€as€Omer€contends,€thatÏRobinsonððs€affidavit€presents€a€set€of€facts€too€incredible€to€beÏaccepted€by€reasonable€minds.€€Ìà@ àIII.Ìà àWe€next€consider€whether€Omerððs€actions€in€reporting€LineberryððsÏactivities€to€the€Attorney€General,€and€as€a€consequence€exposingÏRobinson€to€civil€liability,€constitute€outrageous€conduct.€€We€agreeÏwith€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€it€does€not.€€Ìà àIn€order€to€successfully€assert€a€claim€for€outrageous€conduct€inÏTennessee,€the€plaintiff€must€establish,€first,€that€the€conduct€is€soÏoutrageous€that€it€is€not€tolerated€by€civilized€society€and€second,€thatÍthe€conduct€complained€of€resulted€in€serious€mental€injury.€€ò òòòMedlin€v.ÏAllied€Inv.€Co.ó óóó,€217€Tenn.€469,€479,€398€S.W.2d€270,€274€(1966).€ÏAlthough€ð ðoutrageous€conductðð€is€not€easily€defined,€we€find€theÏdescription€of€outrageous€conduct€set€forth€in€the€òòRestatementÏ(Second)€of€Torts,€óó€ðð€46,€Comment€d€(1965)€instructive:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIt€has€not€been€enough€that€the€defendant€hasÏacted€with€an€intent€which€is€tortious€or€evenÏcriminal,€or€that€he€has€intended€to€inflictÏemotional€distress,€or€even€that€his€conduct€hasÏbeen€characterized€by€ð ðmalice,ðð€or€a€degree€ofÏaggravation€which€would€entitle€the€plaintiff€toÏpunitive€damages€for€another€tort.€€Liability€hasÏbeen€found€only€where€the€conduct€has€been€soÏoutrageous€in€character,€so€extreme€in€degree,Ïas€to€go€beyond€all€possible€bounds€of€decency,Ïand€to€be€regarded€as€atrocious,€and€utterlyÏintolerable€in€a€civilized€community.€€Generally,Ïthe€case€is€one€in€which€the€recitation€of€theÏfacts€to€an€average€member€of€the€communityÏwould€arouse€his€resentment€against€the€actor,Ïand€lead€him€to€exclaim,€ð ðOutrageous!ððÌÌÓÓò òòòSee€also€Goldfarb€v.€Bakeró óóó,€547€S.W.2d€567,€568„69€(Tenn.€1977);Ïò òòòBlair€v.€Allied€Maintenance€Corp.ó óóó,€756€S.W.2d€267,€273€(Tenn.€App.Ï1988);€ò òòòBryan€v.€Campbelló óóó,€720€S.W.2d€62,€64„65€(Tenn.€App.€1964).€ÏWhether€the€defendantððs€conduct€is€so€extreme€and€outrageous€as€toÏpermit€recovery€is,€in€the€first€instance,€a€question€for€the€court€toÏdetermine.€€ò òòòAlexander€v.€Inmanó óóó,€825€S.W.2d€102€(Tenn.€App.€1991)Í(citing€ò òòòMedlinó óóó,€217€Tenn.€at€481,€398€S.W.2d€at€275).€€Ìà àOmerððs€alleged€actions€are€not€so€extreme€as€to€go€beyond€theÏbounds€of€decency.€€None€of€Omerððs€alleged€conduct€was€directedÏtoward,€or€directly€affected,€Robinson.€€Thus,€even€if€it€is€true,€asÏRobinson€alleges,€that€Omer€reported€Lineberryððs€videotaping€activitiesÏto€the€Attorney€General€because€Lineberry€reported€Omer€to€the€TBPR,Ïall€of€which€resulted€in€Robinsonððs€role€in€the€videotaping€beingÏexposed,€such€conduct€is€not€€ð ðoutrageous,ðð€particularly€as€it€affectedÏRobinson.€€ò òòòGann€v.€Keyó óóó,€758€S.W.2d€538,€543€(Tenn.€App.€1988).€€BasedÏupon€the€record€before€us,€we€hold€that€Robinson€has€not€substantiatedÏhis€claim€of€outrageous€conduct.Ìà@ àIV.Ìà àThe€final€question€Robinson€raises€is€whether€the€trial€courtÏerred€in€granting€Omerððs€motion€for€summary€judgment€as€to€RobinsonððsÏclaim€of€invasion€of€privacy.€€œ›à àTennessee€courts€recognize€a€causeÏof€action€for€invasion€of€privacy.€€ò òòòMartin€v.€Senators,€Inc.ó óóó,€220€Tenn.Ï465,€469,€418€S.W.2d€660,€662;€ò òòòLangford€v.€Vanderbilt€Universityó óóó,Ï199€Tenn.€389,€401,€287€S.W.2d€32,€38€(1956);€òòò òBeard€v.€Akzona,€Inc.ó óóó,Ï517€F.€Supp.€128,€132€(E.D.€Tenn.€1981).€€In€order€to€state€a€cause€ofÏaction€for€invasion€of€privacy€under€the€tort€of€public€disclosure€ofÍprivate€facts,€a€plaintiff€must€establish€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àOne€who€gives€publicity€to€a€matter€concerningÏthe€private€life€of€another€is€subject€to€liabilityÏto€the€other€for€invasion€of€his€privacy,€if€theÏmatter€publicized€is€of€a€kind€that€(a)€would€beÏhighly€offensive€to€a€reasonable€person,€and€(b)Ïis€not€of€legitimate€concern€to€the€public.€€ÌÓÓòòœ›Restatement€(Second)€of€Torts,€óó€ðð€652D€(1977);€ò òòòBeardó óóó,€517€F.€Supp.€atÏ132.€€€Ìà àRobinson€claims€that,€by€informing€Thompson€of€LineberryððsÏactivities,€Omer€made€public€private€facts€about€Robinson.€€Initially,Ïwe€note€that€there€is€no€proof€in€the€record€that€Omer€publicized€anyÏfacts€about€Robinson.€€The€record€is€clear€that,€although€ThompsonÏdeduced€that€a€third€party€was€involved€as€cameraman,€Thompson€didÏnot€learn€from€Omer€that€Robinson€was€that€person.× ƒ0 ××  ×€€Furthermore,Ïreporting€what€one€believes€to€be€illegal€activity€to€an€attorney€generalÏdoes€not€necessarily€constitute€ð ðpublicizingðð€private€facts.€€In€ò òòòBeardó óóó,Ïthe€court€explained:€€ð ð[E]ssential€to€recovery€is€a€showing€of€a€publicÏdisclosure€of€private€facts.€€Communication€to€a€single€individual€or€toÏa€small€group€of€people,€absent€breach€of€contract,€trust,€or€otherÍconfidential€relationship,€will€not€give€rise€to€liability.ðð€€ò òòòIdó óóó.€at€132.€ÏThere€is€no€evidence€that€Robinson€and€Omer€had€an€attorney„client€orÏany€other€fiduciary€relationship.× ƒ1 ××  ×€€Based€on€the€foregoing,€we€hold€thatÏthe€trial€court€acted€properly€in€granting€Omerððs€motion€for€summaryÏjudgment€with€regard€to€Robinsonððs€claim€of€invasion€of€privacy.€€Ìà àAccordingly,€the€order€of€the€trial€court€granting€summaryÏjudgment€to€defendant€on€plaintiffððs€negligent€misrepresentation€causeÏof€action€is€reversed,€and€in€all€other€respects€this€order€is€affirmed.€ÏThe€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€further€proceedings€as€areÏnecessary.€€Costs€of€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellee.ÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ó óÌÌò òÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌó ó_________________________________Ìò òALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€JUDGEó óÌÌò ò_________________________________ÌDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGEó óœÔ€ÔÔ€Ô